Children are the responsibility of their parents. These children in detention are far better off than when (if we are to believe it ) they were on the run or being persecuted in their own country. They are lucky that they are in detention. They could have been sent back to where they came from. Their parents are criminals and have broken our laws. They cost the Australian taxpayer more per head to keep them in detention than it costs to keep our criminals behind bars.
They are kept in luxury compared to where they came from, my message to them "Dont winge about your conditions just be glad you are safe and have a chance of a better life,Cop it sweet and if you are deported then you deserve to be, We are a fair country"

Aren't you lucky, Kezza, that you were born (or at least live) in a safe and prosperous environment. What a pity that you are unable to see why you might at least consider sharing some of that luck with others, particularly children.
Lucky to be in detention because its better than the country they are fleeing from? If that's lucky what do you call your good fortune? Or do you think you deserve your luck and they deserve their bad luck? Do you have any children? If you do, can you imagine what it might be like if you and they had been less lucky, born girls perhaps in afghanistan or children of any gender in Dafur? Might you, as a good parent, have done anything you could to get them to a safer, better country?
What kind of people are Australian's becoming?

Enja. I have 5 children 13 grand children all well and happy. what you are saying "lets open our doors to ALL the children of the world"
I have fought in 2 wars and I have seen the Cruelty man (& Woman) inflict on the children of the world, I have seen babies burnt, chopped up & starved by their Parents, So yes these children in detention are "lucky" at least they have a chance. Lets not kid ourselves, they are getting food and medical. Yes I feel sorry for the Kids that are deported for the actions of the parents.
So when you can lay claim to children & Grandchildren only then can you Judge others.
Reading your posts it seem that "It's your way or no other way"

Deported for the actions of your parents and sustaining psychological abuse as a direct result of a policy implemented by the Australian Government are now the same? Should you cop it sweet if your wrongfully deported? We've all seen the kind of 'medical' treatment obtained by Cornelia Rau whilst she was in detention. Children do not belong in detention. It may be the parents actions that put them there but it's the Australian government that keeps them there.
For those that say we will be inundated with boat people if there was no mandatory detention should note that for the first 5 years after it's introduction there was actually an increase in boat people.

enaj: If someone offered me a job that paid three times as much as I am getting now on condition that I wore an electronic bracelet, I would take it, so, I suspect, would you. If someone is concealing their identity, they are committing fraud and should not be rewarded by release into the community. Two year jail sentences have been proposed for such people in Britain. We should only accept electronic bracelets, with the right to live and work in the community, for people who might be genuine refugees and provided that they give up their rights to endless appeals.

ennaythac: Mandatory detention did stop the boats, just not instantly. The people smuggling networks were used to dealing with gutless governments in Europe and North America. They thought that Australia was bluffing or would soon back down under the influence of people like you. It took several years until even the most naive of their clients got the message.

Andrew Bartlett: If you doubt that mass migration, especially illegal, undercuts the local poor, see "The New Americans", the 1997 report of the American National Academy of Sciences. You can find references to peer reviewed papers that establish this also by Prof. George Borjas of Harvard (www.borjas.com), Prof. Vernon Briggs of Cornell and Profs. Donald Davis and David Weinstein of Columbia (www.cis.org). How many peer reviewed papers are necessary before an assertion ceases to be a myth? Even the pro-immigration Cato Institute accepts this. It just considers the American working poor acceptable collateral damage.

Divergence:
Suggesting we can only choose between an 'open door policy' or mandatory detention is absurd. No country in the world has an open door policy, they just have different ways of dealing with onshore asylum seekers.

Nor is this anything to do with mass migration. Australia's skilled migration intake has gone from approx 35 000 in 1999 to close to 100 000 next year. Our number of temporary resident 'migrants' is more than double that again. There are over 50 000 visa overstayers 'loose' in the Australian community, virtually none of who are asylum seekers - if they did seek asylum we would know who and where they are. In that sense, seeking asylum is the opposite of illegal migration - i.e. people who try to disappear into the community and remain without authorisation. Linking asylum seekers in Australia with 'mass migration' or 'illegal immigrants' confuses issues which have very little in common, hence the many myths around the issue.

To say "not many people make false asylum claims here because they know they are likely to be found out and not be released from detention" flies in the face of the evidence. The fact is people have stayed imprisoned in Australia for over 6 years before being recognised as a refugee, rather than return to danger. When people are "found out" (which I presume is a pejorative way of saying their refugee claim is unsuccessful), they are deported. The very small number who have no country that will take them would be in that situation regardless of whether they were locked up here indefinitely or not.

The notion of supporting indefinite jailing of people on the word of a bureaucrat or a politician, without any charge or trial, regardless of individual circumstance, with no scope for independent review of this decision to imprison, is such a dangerous notion that I am continually amazed that anyone living in a democratic country wants to defend it, let alone in relation to a group of people who clearly pose no threat to us at all.